Pavel Kolomensky(mind. April 3 (13) listen)) - bishop of the Russian Orthodox Church, bishop of Kolomna and Kashira.
He actively supported opponents of the reforms of Patriarch Nikon, but at the same time did not separate from the Patriarchal Church. He is revered by the Old Believers as a saint in the guise of a martyr.
Biography [ | ]
Paul's family moved to the village of Kirikovo, where the Nizhny Novgorod priest Anania, considered one of the best confessors and the most educated person, came to serve. In the second half of the 1620s, John Neronov came to Ananias to study, meeting and making friends with the son of the second Kirikovo priest, the future bishop.
Paul argued his point of view with references to two ancient statutes - “charotein” and “written”. Apparently, the reaction to Bishop Paul's speech was stormy. Subsequently, he “cryingly” recalled how “he was tortured at the council, and how insolence and evil things were done to him.” The work presents a dialogue between Bishop Paul and Patriarch Nikon, where the first four times draws the attention of the second to the fact that his opinion does not correspond to the catechism Orthodox Church.
According to Archdeacon Pavel of Aleppo, “the Bishop of Kolomna, being of an obstinate disposition, did not want to accept and approve that act, nor to lay his hand, not to mention give his testimony.” In fact, the formulation adopted at the Council: to rule “against the old and Greek books” (that is, according to ancient non-heretical models) satisfied him. The signature of Bishop Pavel of Kolomna and Kashira is under the acts of the Council, among others. Here his special opinion about bowing is stated: “And what he said at the Holy Council about bowing, and that charter of the Charatean for justification was laid down here, and another in writing.” The authority that Bishop Paul enjoyed in the Church initially prompted Nikon to resort to peaceful persuasion in order to convince Bishop Paul to change his mind about reforms. Simeon Denisov relayed the dispute that occurred between the Patriarch and Archpastor Kolomna. According to Old Believer legend, this dispute ended with Nikon tearing off Pavel’s robe and beating him without mercy with his own hands. The presentation of the incident in the documents of the official church is somewhat more cautious: the Great Moscow Council of 1666 blamed Nikon for being “the only one... except for all Local Council, on him his sins must be revealed... After the deposition of Paul, Bishop of Kolomna, he was cruelly stripped from his mantle and betrayed to severe beatings and punishment, and betrayed to distant imprisonment...”
Was without a Council Court (despite all church rules) was deprived of the episcopal see by Nikon and exiled to the Paleostrovsky monastery. After this, Nikon wrote a slanderous letter to Patriarch Paisius I of Constantinople - allegedly he and John Neronov composed new prayers and church rites, and were corrupting people and separating from the cathedral church. The misled Patriarch of Constantinople condemned the “supporters of innovation.” Bishop Pavel was exiled by Nikon to Lake Onega, to the Paleostrovsky Nativity Monastery, where he stayed for a year and a half. The conditions of detention were quite difficult, but the saint and confessor had the opportunity to communicate with the laity and priests who flocked to him, receiving advice, consolation and archpastoral blessing from him.
Know... the church of God and remain in it, enduring all attacks to the end; Beware of the meeting of demons, and the meeting of the wicked is also called the Church of God. (p. 16)
Stand and uphold the tradition of the holy apostles and holy fathers; Honor the priest, do not remain without him, come to repentance, maintain fasts, avoid drunken drinking, do not lose the Body of Christ. ... (P. 25.)
Some Old Believer sources mention the “Great Council” (pp. 16-18), convened with the blessing of Bishop Paul in (near the place of exile of Pavel Kolomensky). Eat different points view, whether it took place - as described.
Burning of Pavel Kolomensky. 19th century miniature
The Great Moscow Council of 1666-1667, which judged Nikon, charged him with the deposition and death of Bishop Paul: “But you, Nikon, without a council, Bishop Paul of Kolomna, contrary to the rules, overthrew and cursed him and sent him into exile and tortured him there, and then your overthrow will be charged as murder.”
Memory [ | ]
Among the followers of the Old Rite, the veneration of Bishop Paul as a saint began immediately after his death and continues to this day. The Old Believer tradition has a great many “Tales” about Bishop Paul, but separating the legendary information in them from the actual historical narrative presents considerable difficulty. Dmitry Urushev complains that “A lot of fables and fantasies are piled up around the names of Bishop Paul. He happened to be the hero of absolutely incredible Old Believer legends and arbitrary historical fabrications. It is all the more unfortunate that many indisputable and reliable information» .
Outside the Old Believer environment, the figure of Bishop Paul found itself in the shadow of his more famous contemporaries - Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Patriarch Nikon and Archpriest Avvakum and rarely attracted the attention of scientists. As priest Sergius Kulemzin notes, “in our church historical literature, news about Bishop Paul is extremely scarce. This is due to the fact that for a long time, right up to the end of the synodal period, the topic of the schism and its leaders (to whom Bishop Paul indirectly belonged) was either kept silent or presented in a deliberately tendentious manner.”
The first secular historian to pay attention to Bishop Paul was Mikhail Pogodin, who in 1854 published in the magazine “Moskvityanin” the article “Note on the homeland of Patriarch Nikon and his opponents,” where he called on young scientists: “How important and useful for science You can also do this by getting acquainted with written literature and beginning to carefully collect information about our historical figures. What do we know in general about some... Bishop Paul? .
In 1938, the French scientist Pierre Pascal published the book “Archpriest Habakkuk and the Beginning of the Schism,” where he tried to reconstruct the biography of Bishop Paul.
Literature [ | ]
- Calendar of the Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church for 2006. - Publication of the Unified Council of the Ancient Orthodox Pomeranian Church.
- The story of the suffering and death of the Hieromartyr Paul, Bishop of Kolomna.
- Urushev D. A. On the biography of Bishop Pavel Kolomensky // Old Believers in Russia (XVII-XX centuries): Collection. scientific works. - Vol. 3. / Answer. ed. and comp. E. M. Yukhimenko. - M.: Languages of Slavic culture, 2004. - P. 21-22.
To which I answered him:
Pavel Bishop Kolomna was not beaten or tortured. Or rather, all this happened to him in the stories of the Old Believers. Avvakum wrote about the “torment and burning” of Paul: “... tormented Bishop Paul of Kolomna; and in the Novgorod region he burned with fire...”, then Semyon Denisov wrote that Paul was burned in a log house.
In “The History of Paul, Bishop of Kolomna” we read: “Then Patriarch Nikon roared like an angry lion and began to beat mercilessly on the cheeks of the Right Reverend; and until then he was beaten, until he was exhausted. And the Right Reverend Paul fell to the ground, as if dead, and, having come into himself a little, rose up, gave thanks to him and stood in silence.”
It is interesting that the Moscow Council of 1666, when deciding the issue of Nikon’s deposition, set former patriarch The only crime he is guilty of is that he “stripped the bishop of Kolomna from his robes to cruelty and betrayed him to severe beatings and punishment.”
This is what the author of “History” writes about: “Then Nikon was filled with rage, and ordered the blessed one to put iron shackles on him and take him to prison behind a strong guard and with the strictest punishment, not allowing anyone to enter him and not giving him food except the assigned guard. , moreover, he was evil and inhuman; commanding him to cause great sorrow and annoyance to Bishop Paul."
Those. We are not talking about beating, but about “handing over for beating and punishment.” Realizing that the council, which needed to condemn Nikon at all costs, dragged everything that could be added to the case, I allow myself to doubt Nikon’s “bestial cruelty”, and think about this conflict in a slightly different way than They usually approach him.
Here it must be stated that two characters came head-to-head (it’s for nothing that Paul was previously the lover of Nikon, who elevated Paul to the Kolomna See). According to the testimony of contemporaries, the Bishop of Kolomna was both cool and stern, and fully corresponded to his patriarch in character. So, when they disagreed on reform, nothing but “war” could result. Nikon had power, and Pavel lost, but if Pavel had power, what would have happened to Nikon? And the same thing - there was such a time, such people were - people accustomed to blood and struggle (both shepherds who quarreled were contemporaries of the time of troubles).
Both Nikon and Pavel were for correction, but if Nikon was a “Grecophile”, then Pavel was a “Russophile”, and in the light of modern knowledge about the peculiarities of liturgical regulations among the Greeks and Russians, it turns out to be a struggle between “sharp-pointed people” and “blunt-pointed people”, i.e. This is a dispute that has no outlet or resolution.
At the Council, Nikon simply could not beat Paul, because there was nothing to beat him for, and it was inappropriate (under the Tsar!) - Paul signed the Council Resolution, although with a significant reservation. When exactly Nikon beat Pavel “to the point of exhaustion” is unclear. Perhaps their fight continued for some time (for all his “animal cruelty,” Nikon continued to argue with his opponents for some time, instead of immediately “rolling them into asphalt”).
And then - defrocking, arrest, exile. Nikon was charged with the fact that he did this unlawfully - by a single decision, but similar cases had happened before, before Nikon, otherwise the patriarch would not have dared to take such actions. They accuse him of punishing him twice for the same thing (and defrocking him and exiling him), but, as I think, he exiled him for something completely different, namely for the fact that Paul, like other leaders of the Old Believers, began an active intra-church activities against the Patriarch.
In the Paleostrovsky Nativity Monastery, Paul is kept “in terrible conditions,” but what kind of conditions these are becomes clear if you know that everyone had free access to the prisoner, which the disgraced man took full advantage of and freely received numerous guests for a year and a half. Then he is transferred to Novgorod, to the Khutyn Monastery, where, as the Old Believers claim, he “took upon himself the feat of foolishness,” or as their opponents say (for example, Bishop Lazar (Baranovich) - a contemporary of the events), he went crazy.
I don’t know how it really was there, only the obstinate bishop of the defrock not only did not stop his activity, but apparently even intensified it, so that the especially persistent “pilgrims” began to be arrested. However, I willingly admit the third version - no one went crazy, and “foolishness” is an excellent excuse for gaining freedom of action (foolish fools in Russia were not only revered, but even feared by the authorities).
The question of how Paul died is open. Old Believers claim that he was either killed, or burned, or both together: “Nikon sent his servants there to the Novgorod borders, where he wandered on foot. There they found him in an empty place, walking and seizing him like wolves on a meek sheep, and killing him to death, and burning his body with fire according to Nikon’s command. And thus Nikon the wolf would bring an end to God’s servant, so that he would not expose him as a criminal.”
But I doubt it. If they had burned it, they wouldn’t have denied it; they would have blamed Nikon for it too. Could assassins be sent to him? It’s unlikely – it’s not the case, it’s not the environment (unless, of course, we assume that the “Nikonians” are some kind of pathological “killer beasts”). Officially, he died “who knows how” - “if the bishop came, he would be amazed and die poor, except to know whether he was devoured by animals or drowned in water.” I don’t know where the story about the assassins sent came from, but semantically this motive is close to the “murder of Tsarevich Dmitry.” The only bishop who objected to Nikon - how could a legend not appear here?
And so, instead of the “canonically coherent” picture of “standing up for the faith,” etc., etc. - a story about disorder and personal ambitions in the Russian Church after troubled times. Nikon was cool, but his opponents were also cool.
However, to the credit of the church authorities of that time, it must be said that they began to burn schismatics only after they began to preach and bless “fires” - mass self-immolations. The savagery of the authorities was fueled by the savagery of the growing schism.
However, here Paul enjoyed considerable freedom and continued to preach. The Old Believer “Tale of the suffering and death of the Hieromartyr Paul, Bishop of Kolomna” has been preserved, which, in particular, speaks of a certain “great council” that took place with the blessing of Paul and some other bishops in the Kurzhetsk monastery under Abbot Dosifei. At the council, a strict definition was drawn up: those who come from the “Nikonian” Church should not be baptized and ordained (i.e., priesthood). It is possible that Paul's active role in the Kurzhetsky Cathedral was the reason that he was transported from Paleoostrov to the Khutyn Monastery in Novgorod in the year and was placed under stricter supervision.
The final circumstances of his life are unknown. Deacon Theodore writes the following: “That Paul, the blessed bishop, began to disfigure for Christ’s sake.” According to Archbishop Lazar (Baranovich), Paul went crazy; The Khutyn abbot and the monastery brethren considered Bishop Paul crazy, and therefore decided not to burden themselves with supervising him, giving him full opportunity to wander in the vicinity of the monastery wherever he pleased. Paul used his freedom to wander around the surrounding area to preach ancient rites among the local residents. According to the stories of the Old Believers, the abbot of the Khutyn Monastery “tormented” him.
The official version at the time was: “No one saw how the poor man died: whether he was kidnapped by animals or fell into the river and drowned.” Subsequently, during the trial of Nikon at the Great Moscow Council, the former patriarch was charged with the crime of deposing Bishop Paul by his own authority, without a council:
"Yes you are, Nikon, - says the conciliar verdict, - Bishop Paul of Kolomna, without a council, contrary to the rules, overthrew and cursed him and sent him into exile and tortured him there, and then your overthrow will be charged with murder.".
Sources
- The Life of Archpriest Avvakum, written by himself, and his other works, Moscow, 1960, 65.
- The story of the suffering and death of the Hieromartyr Paul, Bishop of Kolomensky, Combined manuscript of the 18th century, BAN, Collection. Druzhinina, No. 127, l. 266–276 vol.
Literature
- Panchenko, A. M., Russian history and culture: Works different years St. Petersburg, 1999, 401.
- Macarius (Bulgakov), Metropolitan, The history of the Russian schism, known as the Old Believers, Moscow, 1855, 249.
- Filippov, I., History of the Vygovskaya Old Believer Hermitage, Moscow, 2005, 88-89.
Used materials
- Christianity: Encyclopedic Dictionary: in 3 volumes., Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1995.
- Article Encyclopedic Dictionary Brockhaus and Efron:
- “To the 350th anniversary of the martyrdom of Bishop Pavel Kolomensky”, website of the “Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church” Old Believers, 3.IV.2006:
Encyclopedic YouTube
1 / 1
✪ 01.Lecture one: Are the Old Believers the heirs of the Third Rome?
Subtitles
Biography
In June 1651 he was appointed rector of the Pafnutyevo-Borovsky monastery. Pavel was elevated to the abbess by Patriarch Joseph. Paul’s closeness to the Circle of Devotees of Piety should have played a role in this elevation, since the elevation to the abbess of such a famous monastery as the Pafnutyevo-Borovsky Monastery was impossible without prior approval of the candidacy with the tsar and his confessor, Archpriest Stefan Vonifatiev, or Nikon himself (then Metropolitan of Novgorod).
Paul argued his point of view with references to two ancient statutes - “charotein” and “written”. Apparently, the reaction to Bishop Paul's speech was quite stormy. Subsequently, he “cryingly” recalled how “he was tortured at the council, and how insolence and evil things were done to him.” The work presents a dialogue between Bishop Paul and Patriarch Nikon, where the first four times ( pages 6, 7, 8 and 11) draws the second’s attention to the fact that his opinion does not correspond to the catechism of the Orthodox Church.
He was deprived of his episcopal see by Nikon without a conciliar trial (contrary to all church rules) and exiled to the Paleostrovsky monastery. After this, Nikon wrote a slanderous letter to Patriarch Paisius I of Constantinople - allegedly he and John Neronov composed new prayers and church rites, and were corrupting people and separating from the cathedral church. The misled Patriarch of Constantinople condemned the “supporters of innovation.” Bishop Pavel was exiled by Nikon to Lake Onega, to the Paleo-Ostrovsky Nativity Monastery, where he stayed for a year and a half. The conditions of detention were quite difficult, but the saint and confessor had the opportunity to communicate with the laity and priests who flocked to him, receiving advice, consolation and archpastoral blessing from him.
Know... the church of God and remain in it, enduring all attacks to the end; Beware of the meeting of demons, and the meeting of the wicked is also called the Church of God. ( page 16) Stand and uphold the tradition of the holy apostles and holy fathers; Honor the priest, do not remain without him, come to repentance, maintain fasts, avoid drunken drinking, do not lose the Body of Christ. … ( page 25)
Some Old Believer sources mention a “great council” (pp. 16-18), convened with the blessing of Bishop Paul in the Kurzhetsky Monastery (near the place of exile of Paul Kolomensky). There are different points of view on whether it took place as described.
Outside the Old Believer environment, the figure of Bishop Paul found itself in the shadow of his more famous contemporaries - Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Patriarch Nikon and Archpriest Avvakum and rarely attracted the attention of scientists. As priest Sergius Kulemzin notes, “in our church historical literature, news about Bishop Paul is extremely scarce. This is due to the fact that for a long time, right up to the end of the synodal period, the topic of the schism and its figures (to whom Bishop Paul indirectly belonged) was either kept silent or presented in a deliberately tendentious manner.”
The first secular historian to pay attention to Bishop Paul was Mikhail Pogodin, who in 1854 published in the magazine “Moskvityanin” the article “Note on the homeland of Patriarch Nikon and his opponents,” where he called on young scientists: “How important and useful for science You can also do this by getting acquainted with written literature and beginning to carefully collect information about our historical figures. What do we know in general about some... Bishop Paul? .
In 1938, the French scientist Pierre Pascal published the book “Archpriest Habakkuk and the Beginning of the Schism,” where he tried to reconstruct the biography of Bishop Paul.
Literature
- Urushev D. A. Bishop Pavel Kolomensky and his role in the formation of Old Believer ideology. Graduate work. M.: RSUH, 2001. P. 37.
- Urushev D. A. On the biography of Bishop Pavel Kolomensky // Old Believers in Russia (XVII-XX centuries): Collection. scientific works. Vol. 3. Answer. ed. and comp. E. M. Yukhimenko. M.: Languages of Slavic Culture, 2004. pp. 21-22.
- The story of the suffering and death of the Hieromartyr Paul, Bishop of Kolomna
- Calendar of the Old Orthodox Pomeranian Church for 2006. Publication of the Unified Council of the Ancient Orthodox Pomeranian Church.
The Tale of the Suffering and Death of the Hieromartyr Paul
Bishop Kolomensky
We are coming to the legend of the thousand year 162, from Nikon's patriarchate from the same time, this wondrous sufferer resisting Nikon's new tradition, and the dangerous keeper of the ancient patristic contents of the sacred bishops God's man This Paul of Kolomensky, for the name of Jesus Christ, and for the ancient Orthodoxy of the Church, was sent to imprisonment in the Olonetsky district in the Paleostrovsky monastery, where he remained for some time, there freely teaching the peoples and affirming life in the patristic tradition and piety of zeal. This imitator in everything of the Holy Father, and commanded those who come from the Great Russian Church to baptize the newly baptized with true baptism, to receive the newly ordained priests in no way, but also commanded everyone to be very correctly true Christian those who want to follow it in the right evangelical way, do not accept a single secret, as evidenced by all the holy men, like the Solovetsky monastery of the monastic rank, and the sacred monks, who were the great cathedral of that holy monastery, who followed everything from the new lovers, a suffering chariot to heaven the village sent a message. Such are the many other sacred sufferers, both of the monastic rank, and of the worldly people, ancient people. Once upon a time, the good novice of Paul the Bishop asked this holy father, offering him his great needs in the priesthood, saying: “O Reverend, our sacred and passion-bearing saints and great-moving Father, if your shrine will pass away from us in the future, and the holy and bloodless sacrifice will fade away on earth, and the priesthood will perish to the end, whoever lights for us the priesthood lamp of God's holy service, since, our most sacred father, you have rewarding grace in the priesthood, and all the holy church mysteries are sanctified by you, if you, most sacred father, do not light this lamp, then it will truly go out in we have a visible priesthood, and then the need of the present time and the future for us of our brethren will be great for all the faithful.”
Then the holy Bishop Paul answered to them: “My spiritual brothers and friends in Christ, the Great Russian Church still has three lamps in its depths, and their holy stucco contains them, even before our ancient holy churches preserve immaculate piety. You should rely on these. These sacred men are filled with great zeal.”
Then again, when you asked this holy man Bishop Paul about the honor of some of the holy monks, monks, and simple pious people who came, telling him: “About whom you say this, our holy lord, and which lamps, brightly burning with ancient holy piety, do you want to show, we ask you to show us this shrine.” and do not abandon your orphan children? The spirit-bearing Paul spoke to them: “I say to Macarius, Metropolitan of Novgorod, this lamp I show you, keeping in its depths the light of truth and ancient piety. The second river is similar to the first lamp of Markel, Archbishop of Vologotsk. This also preserves the mind of the ancient holy church, in which he was baptized and truly ordained. In the same way I speak to you of the third lamp, Alexander, Bishop of Vyatka. Even if you left your throne, you would not deign to accept Nikon’s new tradition. Shut yourself up in your cell, and with crying and sobbing ancient piety preserves in its depths. Moreover, these three lamps were still on their altars then in their dioceses and their ordained priests were strengthened, so that they would not accept new things, and they themselves would serve and bless them, as they had first received from the holy shepherds, according to the ancient church custom of performing God’s services. I am now exiled from my throne; what can the Imam do now, since I am exiled from my throne? You are still the father of the saints and firmly uphold the ancient church tradition, and may God’s blessing be upon you, from now to eternity! I also tell you, my friend, that there are men of heavenly calling and discordant women of the holy church. In you there are men, sacred monks, and monks, and simple pious men who fear God, who observe themselves dangerously and comfortably, and those who come to them can use them and help them in the needs that arise, help each other. May the blessing of the Lord be upon you all from now to eternity!” And therefore, not long after, our venerable and sacred father Paul prophetically prophesied about his departure to his others: “Now, my friends, fellow sufferers of Christ, I hope that my separation from you will be shortened, and my mortal flesh will be resolved, and I desire to live with Christ. With you, burning in spirit, my desire is always there, not to leave you.” And then, out of time, he was taken to the Novogorod countries, and there, by the command of the all-evil Nikon (ole daring courage!), without cold and bestiality, the most severe sludge of the fierce tormentor, through much languor, and through much torment, the unpriesthood of the bishop of God's all-eminent bishop, alas, pitifully ended the holy stern tormentor. In a log house made for this, like a lamb without blemish, he mercilessly gave up a fiery death in the year 7164. And so the All-Reverend Paul the Bishop, offering to the Lord an all-sanctified sacrifice, finally brought himself as a pure and holy sacrifice to the Lord, a painful death accepted, and into the heavenly power like a chariot of fire quickly ascended.
I will also tell you about Abbot Dosithea of the Novgorod region, and about the council of holy bishops and other sacred men and God-bearing fathers of Solovetsky.
Therefore, a man appeared, holy in life, in word and deed, great in virtue, shining like the sun in the Novgorod borders, the abbot named Dosifei of the former St. Nicholas Besedovna monastery, distant from Tikhvin, having three fields. This man is adorned with old age and virtue, and for the sake of new dogmas and due persecution and coercion, he left his monastery, taking refuge in different places, even often resorting to the desert of a certain Kurzhetsky monastery in the building of the Venerable Father Efrosin, in which there are also holy churches byahu, in which there are sacred Father Dositheus, gathering with many great fathers and followers and standard bearers, having gathered there from many countries (and) from the Solovetsky monastery, there is no love for God, and there I will offer service to God for the whole world.
Those who came from the Great Russian Church baptized people according to the new books and baptism charter, judged all of them according to the conciliar code, with the blessing of the holy bishops and abbots, and archimandrites, and holy monks, and monks, and all sacred men for the ancient church holy piety who stood courageously, Holy Bishop Pavel Kolomensky, and Holy Macarius, Metropolitan of Novogorod, and Holy Markel, Archbishop of Vologotsk, Holy Bishop Alexander Vyatsky, and Holy Archimandrite Nikandr, the confessor of the Tsarev, and Holy Elijah, Archimandrite of Solovetsky, and this Abbot Dositheus Besedovnago of Tikhvin, and Velirev nostalgic sufferer Avvakum archpriest, and Login and Lazarus, and Nikita, and Job, Barlaam, Elijah, and Paphnutius, John the Archpriest of Moscow, and Solovetsky, and the father of the entire sacred and monastic council, and other great and spiritual men bearing the banner.
There was a conciliar decree about this of all these fathers, in the said desert, in which the first presiding saintly bishop Pavel of Kolomna was the first to preside with his oral command and commandment to Dosifei the above-mentioned abbot, and with a handwritten letter given to him to the council, in which there were also anathemas against the newly emerged Nikonianists and their new unpalatable dogmas of the position are eternal oaths. The same is true for Metropolitan Macarius of Novgorod. The same letter was sent with his cell attendant, Elder Simeon, in which all of Nikon’s innovations are anathematized, and no secrets are commanded to be accepted from them. Also, from Markel, Bishop of Vologotsk, a handwritten letter similar to the one sent here. In the same way, a handwritten letter was sent from Bishop Alexander Vyatsky. In all of them, the new Nikonian unpleasing traditions and dogmas are anathematized. Likewise, the Solovetsky father received a conciliar charter. And from the above-mentioned sufferers, their handwritten letters were brought in, and in all of them, all the innovations introduced by Nikon are put aside, all the sacraments of those newly introduced are swept away, and all sorts of unpleasant things happen to Christians. According to them, looking at the sacredness, they the Fathers of the Council judged everything, and according to the apostolic and paternal rule, and according to the holy council exposition of the blessed and long-suffering Philaret, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, they laid down for the acceptance into the Great Russian Church of the manifest Latin numerous and most vile heresies coming from that very baptism, and the ordination of those is not the ordination of the ordination, but the second ordination of such from the same sacred bishop, if they will be God's favor, we have nowhere to serve the ancient church piety of the priesthood of the bishop. What if someone, having become proud of his disobedience to the conciliar regulations of the holy father and archbishop and the God-loving sufferer, will transgress or violate in some way the provisions of the law that is contrary to the holy father and will not repent? holy church, may he be excommunicated from the entire community of Christianity, and may not be counted among Orthodox Christians, but may the tearers and tearers be counted as such as a schismatic. Likewise, Athanasius, the Patriarch of Constantinople at that time was in Moscow and Nikon’s innovations overthrow and sweep aside the holy churches below baptism from such, nor ordination, below anything else he commanded to be accepted, but to sweep away the subsequent ancient saints by the council. And just as the ancient holy martyr Cyprian, who was in Africa, remembered the cathedral of that region with the bishops, in it it is commanded that every heretic and schismatic of the holy church who were baptized from such should be baptized again by the faithful in three immersions. Sitse bo taco and commanded all the holy Russian sons of the church who would follow them to act and preserve it for the salvation of Christian souls, even until the end of the century. To this she also attached her hands and brought the conciliar ordinance to the holy bishop and long-suffering Paul Paul, and she also accepted it and praised the mind of the holy men, as, in addition to the personal presence of the shepherds of their sacred bishops, the God-loving ordinance in the cathedrals of the holy church, for the confirmation of the faithful in the priesthood, the men laid down the ordinance pleasing to God and signed by the sacredly suffering and sacred hand: Pavel, Bishop of Kolomna, humble bishop, I subscribe.
Likewise, the rest about them also decided above the bishops to sign this cathedral order brought by him with his own hand, and to the Solovetsky monastery in the book depository, to keep it safe, and to entrust all those to the cathedral, and so these sacred men, with the advice and with the blessing of the all-holy Bishop Pavel of Kolomensky, At that time, in that region of Novgorod, in exile, this former and other above-mentioned bishops were in exile, with the blessing and testament coming from the Great Russian Church of the newly baptized, repeating true baptism, which they themselves, in the Lord’s death, were given by the one holy catholic apostolic church alone from the Orthodox. In the same way, we must not accept newly ordained priests, but we also command everyone who wants to stand by them not to accept them. This is evidenced by all the sufferers of the Novgorod region, and the All-Union fathers of the Solovets, and all the desert fathers of the Olonets country. For which they diligently shed their blood even to this day in the Lord. Amen.
This was done in the year 7164, the month of January, on the 7th day.
(Collected manuscript of the 18th century. BAN. Collection of Druzhinin. No. 127, l. 266–276 vol.).
http://pomorian.narod.ru/module28.htm
The last Old Orthodox bishop, Pavel Kolomensky, was born in the Nizhny Novgorod region in the village of Kolychevo into the family of a rural priest at the very beginning of the troubled 17th century. So, by the will of the Lord, it was destined to happen that not far from Kolychevo there was the village of Grigorovo, from which Archpriest Avvakum was from, and the village of Veldemanovo, in which the future Patriarch Nikon was born...
Pavel took monastic vows at the Makarievsky Zheltovodsk Monastery, and in 1636 he was appointed to the post of monastery treasurer. In the second half of the 1640s. By that time, the holy monk Pavel was already a member of the Moscow circle of zealots of piety, headed by Stefan Vnifantev, the confessor of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. The members of the circle were Archpriest Avvakum, Archimandrite Nikon (future patriarch), Archpriest John Neronov, Bishop Hilarion of Ryazan (who later became an ardent persecutor of Old Belief), Abbot Theoktist, future Bishop of Vyatka Alexander, and others.
In 1651, Patriarch Joseph appointed Father Paul to the position of abbot of the Pafnutievo-Borovsky monastery. In 1652, after the death of Patriarch Joseph, Abbot Paul, along with twelve other worthy men, was included in the list of candidates for the high priestly throne. However, at the insistence of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Novgorod Metropolitan Nikon was elected patriarch.
In the fall of 1652, the newly elected Patriarch Nikon elevated Abbot Paul to the rank of Bishop of Kolomna and Kashira.
In 1653, at the beginning of Lent, Nikon sent a decree to churches - “memory”, in which all Orthodox Christians from that day were instructed: “it is not proper for throwing (i.e., bowing) in church on the knee, but at the waist you should make bows, and three fingers would also be baptized.” This notorious “memory”, published by the patriarch alone, without preliminary conciliar discussion, and which was the beginning of the church “reformation” in Rus', was like a bolt from the blue. But it made a particularly difficult impression on the zealots of church piety - the lovers of God. As one of them, Archpriest Avvakum, recalls, “they got together in thought; we see how winter wants to be; my heart grew cold and my legs trembled.” Archpriest John Neronov secluded himself for a week in the cell of the Moscow Chudov Monastery, praying incessantly. And a voice came to him from the icon of the Savior: “The time of suffering has come; it is fitting for you to suffer unremittingly!” Archpriests Avvakum and Daniil of Kostroma, having collected extracts from liturgical books on folding fingers and bowing, submitted them to the king, who gave the archpriests’ petition directly to the patriarch. And already in August 1653, the defeat of the God-lovers began. More than 10 archpriests, the leaders of this movement, were sent into exile. Nikon removed the skufia from John Neronov and imprisoned him in the Spaso-Kamenny Monastery, on Lake Kubenskoye; He deprived Login of Murom of the priesthood and exiled him to the Murom region; He personally tortured Daniil of Kostroma in the Chudov Monastery, and then exiled him to Astrakhan, where he was killed in an earthen prison; Avvakum was exiled to Siberia, and only the intercession of the king saved him from being ejected from the priesthood... Many priests and laymen, supporters of God-lovers, were exiled throughout the country, and some of those exiled were even executed.
Having eliminated his most active opponents, Nikon decided to convene a council to legitimize his lawlessness. The council took place in Moscow the following year, 1654. The council was chaired by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich and Patriarch Nikon. Among the participants were five metropolitans, four archbishops, one bishop, 11 archimandrites and abbots, 13 archpriests, as well as several close associates of the king. The candidacies for the council participants were most carefully selected by the patriarch and the tsar, which gave rise to Father John Neronov calling the council “the host of the Jews.” The resolutions of the council were predetermined by the very method of decision-making: Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich cast his first vote...
However, despite the careful selection of “personnel” carried out by the tsar and the patriarch before the start of the council, there were still dissatisfied people, and one of the bishops openly spoke out in defense of the old books. It was Bishop Pavel Kolomna, who became the first victim of the proud and power-hungry patriarch.
“We will not accept the new faith,” Bishop Pavel bluntly told Nikon. (The essence of this “new faith” would later be very accurately expressed by the New Believer Patriarch Joachim: “I know neither the old nor the new faith, but whatever the rulers tell me, I am ready to do and listen to them in everything.”)
Trying to “reason” with the rebellious bishop and justify the need for book “right”, Nikon declared that we were not talking about a new faith at all, but only about some “corrections” and that “correction requires grammatical skill,” to which Bishop Pavel reasonably answered: “Innovations are not introduced according to the rules of grammar; what grammar commands you to sweep away the three-part cross with the prosphora? But not according to the rules of grammar, you will remove the week of prosphora at the service, multiplying the symbol with additions and additions.” The bishop also listed other innovations that were not introduced according to grammatical rules: the triple “hallelujah” and the addition of fingers, and instead of his signature under the conciliar decrees he wrote: “If anyone takes away from the faithful customs of the holy conciliar church, or adds to them, or in any way - in any way he corrupts, let him be anathema.”
This infuriated Nikon. He personally beat Bishop Paul at the council, tore off his mantle, deprived him of his episcopal see without a council trial, and ordered him to be immediately sent into exile to a distant northern monastery.
None of the bishops decided to follow the example of Bishop Paul and openly protest against innovations, although many disagreed with Nikon. In addition, for silence, each bishop was “given” by the patriarch one hundred rubles (which at that time was a very large sum). The hierarchy, which obediently followed Nikon and the Tsar, began to lose its authority. The initiative in the struggle for the Old Faith and spiritual authority almost immediately passed to ordinary priests, and after the physical destruction of most of them - to selected laymen. Two months after the completion of the cathedral, in July of the same year, Moscow was struck by a severe epidemic of pestilence. Many Orthodox Christians perceived this as God’s punishment for the apostasy of the church hierarchy from the faith of their ancestors.
“So God, for the sins of the rulers, puts the subordinates to death, and for the bad deeds of those who serve the altar, he allows the holy altars to be plundered by the wicked, and the holy temples to be desolate” (Chetiya Menaea. August 20. Life of the Prophet Samuel). St. Cyprian of Carthage points out (in letter 56, part 1, p. 316): “And so the people, obeying the Divine commandments and fearing God, must separate from the sinner primate and not participate in the sacrifice of the sacrilegious priest.”
The people perfectly understood the pro-Western essence of Nikon's church reform. In 1654, the so-called Copper Riot took place in Moscow, among the demands of which, in particular, was the cessation of church reform. One of the slogans of the rebels directly called a spade a spade: “The Patriarch is unreliable in faith and acts no better than heretics and iconoclasts.”
The situation in the Russian Church in the mid-17th century. to a certain extent resembled the situation in the Greek Church after the Union of Florence. Let us recall that the Union of Florence is the name given to the union of the Western and Eastern Churches, formalized at what the Catholics call the Eighth Ecumenical Council in Florence in 1439. Then the act of union of the Churches was signed on the Byzantine side by Emperor John VIII and representatives of the Eastern patriarchs. Patriarch Joseph of Constantinople, who was present at the council, did not have time to sign this act, since he died suddenly shortly before the end of the council, but both he and his successor, Patriarch Mitrofan, were supporters of the union. 12 years later, in 1451, the union was confirmed by the successor of John VIII, the last Byzantine emperor Constantine XI. Thus, the highest ecclesiastical and secular authorities in Constantinople submitted to Rome, wishing, at the cost of apostasy from Orthodoxy, to receive Western help in the fight against the Turks. However, the church people of Byzantium did not recognize the union, and the legal document signed in Florence, in fact, turned into a piece of paper that no one needed. Byzantine resistance then concentrated around the only bishop who did not recognize the union, Metropolitan Mark Eugenicus of Ephesus. We see a similar situation in Russia: the only bishop who openly opposed the Nikon reform prepared by the Jesuits, Pavel Kolomensky, led the Russian resistance. The different outcome of these two Orthodox popular movements was largely predetermined by the different fate of their leaders-bishops: if Metropolitan Mark of Ephesus managed to survive, then Bishop Paul of Kolomna faced a completely different fate.
Bishop Pavel, for his resistance to Nikon’s “reformation,” was “transmitted to prison,” subjected to torture, but remained adamant. Then Nikon single-handedly deprived him of his dignity and exiled him to Lake Onega to the Paleostrovsky monastery. However, even there, Pavel Kolomensky, taking advantage of some freedom, continued to preach the truth of the Old Faith and taught local Christians to remain firm in the ancient traditions. For this, in 1656, by order of Nikon, he was transferred under stricter supervision to the Novgorod Khutyn Monastery, and then killed.
The official version is: “No one saw how the poor man died: whether he was kidnapped by animals or fell into the river and drowned.” And the Moscow Council of 1666–1667, which tried Nikon for many crimes, blamed the deposition and death of Bishop Paul on the former patriarch: “But you, Nikon,” says the council verdict, “Bishop Paul of Kolomna without a council, contrary to the rules , overthrew and cursed him and sent him into exile and tortured him there, and then your overthrow will be charged with murder.”
Old Believer sources give a different version of the last days of the life of Bishop Pavel Kolomensky. Thus, Deacon Theodore writes the following: “Nikon scolded [him] thieves, removed his rank, and sent him into exile in Khutyn to the monastery of St. Barlaam... That blessed bishop Paul began to disfigure for Christ’s sake.” The testimony of the feat of foolishness undertaken by the bishop is very characteristic - a unique case of a holy fool, previously unknown in either the Greek or Russian Church! As is known, there was a special attitude towards holy fools in Rus'. Fools were loved and listened to. The holy fools were allowed to do things that were not allowed to anyone else. Even the tsar did not dare to offend the holy fool. “Pavel Kolomensky, the only Russian bishop, acts like a fool for a twofold reason. This is the last opportunity to save life, because the holy fool was considered inviolable. This is the last argument in defense of national foundations: the bishop, whose pastoral word was despised, addresses the people with a “strange and wonderful spectacle.”
The Khutyn abbot and the monastery brethren considered Bishop Paul crazy, and therefore decided not to burden themselves with supervising the “madman,” giving him full opportunity to wander around the monastery wherever he pleased. However, the bishop used this freedom to preach Ancient Orthodoxy among the local residents. Nikon became aware of this after some time. “Nikon found out,” writes Deacon Theodore, “and sent his servants there to the Novgorod borders, where he wandered on foot. They found him in an empty place, walking and seizing him like wolves of Christ’s meek sheep, and killing him to death, and burning his body with fire.”
On April 3, 1656, on Maundy Thursday, Holy Bishop Pavel Kolomensky was burned in a log house by people sent by Nikon - “as God’s bread was baked.”
Bishop Paul did not appoint a successor for himself (apparently, it was not God’s Will for this), but “he commanded not to accept from the Russian Church (i.e., the New Believer Church - authors) any sacraments and sacred rites that come from her to rebaptize the newly baptized, and not to accept those newly ordained into her priests, argued that not only holy monks, but also simple pious men can perform some mysteries and satisfy others’ spiritual needs.”
Another interesting document has survived concerning the fate of the martyr bishop. This is the Old Believer “Tale of the suffering and death of the Hieromartyr Paul, Bishop of Kolomna,” which, in particular, speaks of a certain “great council” that took place with the blessing of Bishop Paul and some other bishops in the Kurzhetsk monastery under Abbot Dositheos.
The Kurzhetskaya (Kurzhenskaya) monastery, founded by a certain elder Euphrosynus, was located in the Paleostrovsky region, where Bishop Pavel Kolomensky was exiled. The Old Believer historian Ivan Filippov in “The History of the Beginning of the Vygovskaya Hermitage” writes: “After this, another man appeared, the holy pious abbot Dosifei from the Tikhvina St. Nicholas Besedny monastery, for the sake of piety, adorned with old age and virtues, who often resorted to a certain deserted Kurzhen monastery, in the building of a certain reverend father Euphrosynus, in it are also the holy churches of the byahu, in them the great fasting fathers and standard-bearers gathered with many, who came from many countries and from the Solovetsky monastery, like angels and men on earth and in heaven, serving God for the whole world offering sacrifice and illuminating a virtuous life.” The lives of ancient Orthodox ascetics (Cornilius Vygovsky, Kiril Sunaretsky) also testify to the Kurzhetsky Cathedral.
It was the Kurzhetsk monastery, covered with impenetrable forests and swamps of the Novgorod land, that became the first gathering place for Russian people persecuted for their faith. Here those priests who did not accept Nikon’s innovations continued to perform divine services according to the ancient Orthodox rite. Here in 1656 the first council was held, clearly defining its position in relation to reforms. It is quite natural that, in conditions of severe persecution of dissenters, the cathedral could not meet openly and was a secret cathedral, and the signatures of many persons under the Acts of the Kurzhetsky Cathedral were affixed separately (in the ancient Church, under conditions of persecution, there was a similar practice, when bishops were not able to be in person and sent letters to the councils with their signature). Thus, at the Kurzhetsky Cathedral, letters were read from Metropolitan Macarius of Novgorod, Archbishop Markel of Vologda, Bishop Alexander of Vyatka, Archimandrite Nikanor of Solovetsky, Moscow Archpriest Avvakum and many others. Under the Acts of the Council is also the signature of Patriarch Athanasius Patelor of Constantinople, who was in Russia for some time. In their letters, all the listed bishops and fathers anathematized the Nikonians and their new dogmas. At the council, a strict definition was drawn up: those who come from the Nikonian Church should not be baptized and ordained (i.e., priesthood).
In the “Tale ...” about the Kurzhetsky Cathedral it is said: “There was a conciliar code of all these fathers about this, in the designated desert, in which the first presiding sacred bishop Pavel Kolomensky, by his oral command and commandment to Dositheus, the above-mentioned abbot, and with a handwritten letter given to him, brought to the cathedral , it also contains anathemas against the newly emerged Nikonianists and their new unpleasing dogmas, the essence of which are eternal oaths. The same is true for Metropolitan Macarius of Novgorod. The same letter was sent with his cell attendant, Elder Simeon, in which all of Nikon’s innovations are anathematized, and no secrets are commanded to be accepted from them. Also, from Markel, Bishop of Vologotsk, a handwritten letter similar to the one sent here. In the same way, a handwritten letter was sent from Bishop Alexander Vyatsky. In all of them, the new Nikonian unpleasing traditions and dogmas are anathematized. Likewise, the Solovetsky father received a conciliar charter. And from the above-mentioned sufferers, their handwritten letters were brought in, and in all of them, all the innovations introduced by Nikon are put aside, all the sacraments of those newly introduced are swept away, and all sorts of unpleasant things happen to Christians. According to them, looking at the sacredness, they the Fathers of the Council judged everything, and according to the apostolic and paternal rule, and according to the holy council exposition of the blessed and long-suffering Philaret, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia, they laid down for the acceptance into the Great Russian Church of the manifest Latin numerous and most vile heresies coming from that very baptism, and the ordination of those is not the ordination of the ordination, but the second ordination of such from the same sacred bishop, if they will be God's favor, we have nowhere to serve the ancient church piety of the priesthood of the bishop.
To this she also attached her hands and brought the conciliar ordinance to the holy bishop and long-suffering Paul Paul, and she also accepted it and praised the mind of the holy men, as, in addition to the personal presence of the shepherds of their sacred bishops, the God-loving ordinance in the cathedrals of the holy church, for the confirmation of the faithful in the priesthood, the men laid down the ordinance pleasing to God and signed by the sacredly suffering and sacred hand: Pavel, Bishop of Kolomna, humble bishop, I subscribe.
Likewise, the rest about them also decided above the bishops to sign this cathedral order brought by him with his own hand, and to the Solovetsky monastery in the book depository, to keep it safe, and to entrust all those to the cathedral, and so these sacred men, with the advice and with the blessing of the all-holy Bishop Pavel of Kolomensky, At that time, in that region of Novgorod, in exile, this former and other above-mentioned bishops were in exile, with the blessing and testament coming from the Great Russian Church of the newly baptized, repeating true baptism, which they themselves, in the Lord’s death, were given by the one holy catholic apostolic church alone from the Orthodox. In the same way, we must not accept newly ordained priests, but we also command everyone who wants to stand by them not to accept them. This is evidenced by all the sufferers of the Novgorod region, and the All-Union fathers of the Solovets, and all the desert fathers of the Olonets country. For which they diligently shed their blood even to this day in the Lord. Amen".
Later, some bishops and priests who participated in the Kurzhetsky Cathedral came under pressure from supporters of Patriarch Nikon, and, seeing the fate of Bishop Pavel Kolomensky, they feared for their lives and began to show loyalty to Nikon’s reform.
Apparently, it was Bishop Paul’s active role in the Kurzhetsky Cathedral that was the reason that he was unexpectedly transported from Paleoostrov to Novgorod and there, after torture, he was burned in a log house. But this was not enough for the reformers. They wanted to destroy every reminder of the council that condemned them. When the secret supporter of the Old Faith, Metropolitan Macarius of Novgorod, died in 1663, Metropolitan Pitirim, who headed the Novgorod diocese, a well-known persecutor of Old Orthodoxy and the future patriarch, ordered the Kurzhetsky monastery to be wiped off the face of the earth. “Then the above-mentioned Kurzhetsk Hermitage was destroyed by fierce persecution from the bishop, and the holy churches in it were burned with fire,” testifies the historian of the Vygovskaya Hermitage.
